John D wrote: ↑4) The Dems have no good competition for Trump in 2020 and Trump will win. The public actually will prefer Trump (with 4 years of experience) to Pocahontas or Uncle Joe or the commie Sanders. He could win even with approval ratings in the 30% to 40% range.

I find this pretty hard to believe. He won 2016 thanks to the Rust Belt, Ohio, Iowa and Florida flipping from blue to red. In some cases this happened because of very small margins. I can see him winning Ohio and Iowa again, but keeping Pennsyvlania, Michigan, Wisconsin and Florida is going to be very challenging for him. He won Wisconsin by 29,000 votes, Michigan by 11,000 votes and Pennsylvania by 48,000 votes. Those are very small margins.

In Florida the big news for 2020 elections is that 1 million of ex-felons got their voting rights restored. This is bad news for Republicans, since the ex-felons tend to belong to social groups that vote more for Democratic candidates. Margins in the 2018 elections were razor-thin in favor of the GOP. Ex felons voting might be what tips the balance against any GOP candidate, let alone someone as polarizing as Trump.

Michigan has 10 electoral votes, Wisconsin 16, Pennsylvania 20 and Florida 29. Assuming NO other state flips Trump has to win AT LEAST either all three the Rust Belt States, or one of Rust Belt states AND Florida. That's a tall order.

Potentially it could get even worse for Trump. Due to the Democratic successes in Arizona even Fox News thinks that the Dems have a shot at winning the state. If the Dems win Arizona, then Trump needs to win at least TWO of the Rust Belt states AND Florida.

But there's even more potential for things to get EVEN WORSE for the GOP. 2018 showed that Georgia and TEXAS of all places are becoming much tighter races. If the Dems win Arizona AND Georgia Trump needs to win all three of the Rust Belt razor-thin margins AND Florida to win. If the Dems lose Arizona and Georgia, but somehow manage to pull Texas in their column, Trump loses EVEN if he wins in all three of the Rust Belt states AND Florida.

Trump desperately needs Florida and at least ONE of the Rust Belt states he won by small margins, AND he needs to watch out for Dem gains in Arizona, Georgia, even Texas. It's an uphill battle, especially if he faces a Democrat who's not dumb enough to take the Rust Belt for granted (which, after the shock 2016, no Democrat who's not a complete moron will) and who is charismatic enough to appeal to Florida voters, or (even worse for Trump) Florida AND Arizona, or Georgia, or even Texas voters.

That's even leaving aside Ohio, Iowa and North Carolina, which Trump won by bigger margins and haven't switched or changed as much in 2018, but will still be targets for Democratic campaigns in 2020. If Trump loses Ohio he needs to win Florida AND Pennsylvania. If he loses Iowa he needs to win AT LEAST all three of the Rust Belt states, OR Florida AND one of the Rust Belt states. If he loses Ohio AND Iowa he needs to win Florida AND Pennsylvania AND Michigan.

Trump has actually a negative approval rating in all of the Rust Belt states AND Iowa AND Arizona, equal approval and disapproval in Ohio, and only a marginal positive approval rating in Florida, North Carolina and even Georgia. While approval ratings don't necessarily translate to electoral successes or failures Trump has little reason to look forward to an easy re-election.

If we classified all states were Trump has a positive approval rating as red, all of those where he has a negative approval rating as blue, and those with neutral approval as toss-ups, Trump loses the election 295 vs 225, with 18 toss-up votes. If we're more elastic and classify all states within the 5% of positive-negative approval rating bracket at toss-ups, while those with more than 5% support or disapproval for Trump as, respectively, red or blue, the Dems have 245 "safe" electoral votes, while Trump only has 150 "safe" ones. The Dems only need their "safe" votes and either Florida OR Virginia and Pennsylvania to win. Trump needs ALL of his "safe" votes, several of the votes from the states which are only lukewarm at best about him (including Florida), AND Arizona, Ohio and Pennsylvania.

John D wrote: ↑
I think that youall don't really understand what drives Trump's approval. So, while we are making predictions I will throw mine in.

1) The economy will weaken, but Trump will boost the economy in time for his re-election. If the economy is too slow for him to win the election he will stop his tariff fighting and make the markets happy again.

2) Trump can turn against the Fox reporters just like he turned against the CNN reporters. His fans will love it. He can easily paint Fox News as fake news and his supporters will agree.

3) Trump can survive a great many more "scandals". His fans don't care. Even if he is found guilty of election finance law-breaking, or if some of his businesses are fined, his fan base will not care.

4) The Dems have no good competition for Trump in 2020 and Trump will win. The public actually will prefer Trump (with 4 years of experience) to Pocahontas or Uncle Joe or the commie Sanders. He could win even with approval ratings in the 30% to 40% range.

I think you are right about a couple of things:

1) I don't understand a person who currently supports Trump.

You nailed this one. I have no idea why someone would continue to support Trump, because to me he looks like an ineffective, embarrassing jackass. Even if you are as terrified of brown people as some of the people on this board you could easily disabuse yourself of the notion that Trump or his wall is going to protect you from them. The only thing I can come to to explain hardcore Trump supporters is that they aren't very bright, they think government is a joke, and find trump entertaining. Or they are delusional.

2) His hardcore supporters aren't going to care about a lot of things.

This one is already in evidence. He still has around 40% approval in spite of a lot of bad press. So you are probably right about him having substantial support in 2020 if the economy stays relatively OK. (I don't think even his hardcore supporters will stay with him if the economy tanks - the president is very reliably held responsible for the economy and I think trump's supporters would probably find his antics less amusing from the unemployment line)

The main problem I have with your prediction is the electoral math. You are only considering the fact that some substantial fraction of his supporters love him and will vote for him no matter what. Those people aren't going to decide the election, and didn't decide the election in 2016. In 2016 Donald Trump did only 0.4% better in the proportion of the popular vote than McCain did in 2008. He won because Hillary didn't do that well either. The people Trump has to worry about either voted for him while holding their noses in 2016, or voted 3rd party. The thing that decides the election in 2020 will be whether those people are motivated enough by their distaste for Trump to vote for the Democrat. All the things you predicted won't matter to a hardcore Trump supporter will matter to those people.

John D wrote: ↑I think that youall don't really understand what drives Trump's approval. So, while we are making predictions I will throw mine in.
<snip>

I think you are right about a couple of things:

1) I don't understand a person who currently supports Trump.

You nailed this one. I have no idea why someone would continue to support Trump, because to me he looks like an ineffective, embarrassing jackass. Even if you are as terrified of brown people as some of the people on this board you could easily disabuse yourself of the notion that Trump or his wall is going to protect you from them. The only thing I can come to to explain hardcore Trump supporters is that they aren't very bright, they think government is a joke, and find trump entertaining. Or they are delusional. ....

No doubt there is spectrum of supporters - as is the case with most movements or parties - but I expect that principle is what motivates a great many of them - a principle that many Pitters, and many others, seem to have some difficulty with. I kind of expect that until the Democrats and the "RINOs" get their heads out of their asses, and stop playing partisan politics and being motivated by post-modernist claptrap - see: Title IX; the Democrat's previous support for walls and more "robust" solutions to ILLEGAL immigration on your southern border; "putting men in women's toilets" instead of on Mars as a common meme phrases it; "sanctuary cities"; and pandering to demented theocrats, mostly in Iran; for examples - Trump is going to be the only game in town for a rather larger percentage of the country.

About half of my friends are Trump supporters. All are at least high school graduates and some have some technical training. They are hard working.... a tech in a nuclear plant, a lineman, a IT system administrator, a cell phone tech. They are not all college professors but they all have successful jobs and thriving families. (One of my friends who voted Trump is a college professor... haha). They like Trump because there has been no politician in the last 20 years who spoke to their problems.... until him. They are white and middle class and have been told for the last 20 years that they were the worst people in America. When Hillary called them "deplorables" it simply reinforced what they already knew.

Part of my election prediction includes this factoid. When Trump was first elected may people were scared he would literally destroy the world. When he runs again he will be seen as much less risky than the first time. Many people held their nose and voted Hillary because Trump was scary. He will be much less scary next time.

I admit that I could be wrong... for sure. I do think it is important to keep in mind that he really could win next time. Anyone who is 100% certain he will not be re-elected is making a biased prediction.

John D wrote: ↑I admit that I could be wrong... for sure. I do think it is important to keep in mind that he really could win next time. Anyone who is 100% certain he will not be re-elected is making a biased prediction.

Any political prediction made with 100% certainty is foolish. Trump's re-election is definitely a long shot, though. The Dems would have to fuck up really badly to give him good chances of winning.

John D wrote: ↑I admit that I could be wrong... for sure. I do think it is important to keep in mind that he really could win next time. Anyone who is 100% certain he will not be re-elected is making a biased prediction.

Any political prediction made with 100% certainty is foolish. Trump's re-election is definitely a long shot, though. The Dems would have to fuck up really badly to give him good chances of winning.

I would put even money on Trump's re-election.... but why would I argue with you?.... as you are obviously the smartest mother-fucker on the internet.

John D wrote: ↑I admit that I could be wrong... for sure. I do think it is important to keep in mind that he really could win next time. Anyone who is 100% certain he will not be re-elected is making a biased prediction.

Any political prediction made with 100% certainty is foolish. Trump's re-election is definitely a long shot, though. The Dems would have to fuck up really badly to give him good chances of winning.

If we get Hillary Clinton as our Democratic nominee then I think Trump will win again. IMO this could happen, because Hillary seems to have a cult following who thinks she can do no wrong, and thinks that they only reason she lost in 2016 was because of sexism. I see this kind of person on progressive message boards when I visit them. The conventional wisdom is that a large number of Democrats are going to run in 2020, and IMO Hillary will be dangerous if she decides to run, because she will have a decent number of Democrats already committed to what they see as "righting the injustice of the 2016 election" by renominating her.

If they manage, I think that is what gives Trump his most likely path to victory. The Democrats need a candidate who isn't already disliked by most of the country in order to press their advantage.

John D wrote: ↑I think that youall don't really understand what drives Trump's approval. So, while we are making predictions I will throw mine in.
<snip>

I think you are right about a couple of things:

1) I don't understand a person who currently supports Trump.

You nailed this one. I have no idea why someone would continue to support Trump, because to me he looks like an ineffective, embarrassing jackass. Even if you are as terrified of brown people as some of the people on this board you could easily disabuse yourself of the notion that Trump or his wall is going to protect you from them. The only thing I can come to to explain hardcore Trump supporters is that they aren't very bright, they think government is a joke, and find trump entertaining. Or they are delusional. ....

No doubt there is spectrum of supporters - as is the case with most movements or parties - but I expect that principle is what motivates a great many of them - a principle that many Pitters, and many others, seem to have some difficulty with. I kind of expect that until the Democrats and the "RINOs" get their heads out of their asses, and stop playing partisan politics and being motivated by post-modernist claptrap - see: Title IX; the Democrat's previous support for walls and more "robust" solutions to ILLEGAL immigration on your southern border; "putting men in women's toilets" instead of on Mars as a common meme phrases it; "sanctuary cities"; and pandering to demented theocrats, mostly in Iran; for examples - Trump is going to be the only game in town for a rather larger percentage of the country.

When I talk about Trump's approval, it's worth keeping in mind that 41% of Americans currently approve of Trump (by an average of approval polls) at the current time whereas 53% of us disapprove of him, and this has been typical for most of his presidency.* So sure, that litany of silliness (men in women's bathrooms - really!?) matters more to someone than having a functional government, reasonable staffing in government agencies, and sane relationships with foreign powers (i.e. not Donald Trump sucking the cock of every despot who will flatter him) but it's not a majority of people. Most people aren't retarded enough to fall for this stupefying propaganda, and they probably won't in 2020 either. The reason I keep talking about the popular vote is because no president has ever been elected if their opponent got more than 50% of it, and only Hayes in 1876 was elected when an opponent got 50%.** That Donald Trump has been disapproved of by more than 50% of Americans consistently since March of 2017 means the "lesser of two evils principle" is not on your side.

John D wrote: ↑
About half of my friends are Trump supporters. All are at least high school graduates and some have some technical training. They are hard working.... a tech in a nuclear plant, a lineman, a IT system administrator, a cell phone tech. They are not all college professors but they all have successful jobs and thriving families. (One of my friends who voted Trump is a college professor... haha). They like Trump because there has been no politician in the last 20 years who spoke to their problems.... until him. They are white and middle class and have been told for the last 20 years that they were the worst people in America. When Hillary called them "deplorables" it simply reinforced what they already knew.

Part of my election prediction includes this factoid. When Trump was first elected may people were scared he would literally destroy the world. When he runs again he will be seen as much less risky than the first time. Many people held their nose and voted Hillary because Trump was scary. He will be much less scary next time.

I admit that I could be wrong... for sure. I do think it is important to keep in mind that he really could win next time. Anyone who is 100% certain he will not be re-elected is making a biased prediction.

I agree, to a point. Trump supporters are not behaving rationally, but are heavily invested in him emotionally. They can be quite intelligent, but are suspending this in order to continue their support. QAnon's many interations support this. It is almost certainly a cult, or at least cult-like at this point.

Their is the big question of the Mueller probe. "Individual 1" is already an unindicted co-conspirator in two felonies. This is likely just the tip of the iceberg. While Trump's hardcore base is unlikely to believe anything anybody says against their beloved, the base us insufficient to produce a presidential victory. It is, however, completely sufficient to doom Republicans. A conundrum for the right.

Trump may act completely unstable when he or his kids get out up on the chopping block. Anybody that doesn't think Trump is unstable clearly didn't see today's press conference. I don't think this will go well for Republicans. Which concerns me, because while I lean left, I think the far-left needs a counter in politics. Trump's machinations and idiocy will hand the far-left a huge victory, while discrediting honest conservatives.

Oh, and Trump still has the better part of two years to destroy the world. And failing the whole world, at least the economy. People bragging about the stock market under Trump seem to be a bit more quiet these days.

I belong to our local Democratic Party, am a donor and peripherally involved and aware of the national party. Hillary wants another go, but there's no chance. She will be blocked unless she has a secret, villainous plan. Beto is prancing, but I doubt he'd make it. Biden beats Trump and any other Democrat. The rational Republicans are mostly hoping that Trump steps down before 2020, and an untainted Republican steps up. Believe it or not, watch Kasich and Romney. My guess is that Biden will choose Kamala or Warren as VP and the party will coalesce around that far better than they did around Clinton.

Sunder wrote: ↑
I'll give him a coinflip on making it to 2020. He won't win if he does.

A lot of people are predicting he will step down in return for no charges against him or his spawn and the preservation of his financial empire. It sounds entirely plausible. The Trump fans will take this very poorly, and I wouldn't be surprised if there's violence.

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑
I belong to our local Democratic Party, am a donor and peripherally involved and aware of the national party. Hillary wants another go, but there's no chance. She will be blocked unless she has a secret, villainous plan. Beto is prancing, but I doubt he'd make it. Biden beats Trump and any other Democrat. The rational Republicans are mostly hoping that Trump steps down before 2020, and an untainted Republican steps up. Believe it or not, watch Kasich and Romney. My guess is that Biden will choose Kamala or Warren as VP and the party will coalesce around that far better than they did around Clinton.

Don't discount Inslee as a running partner for Biden. He probably has enough support as a youngish, rational, successful West Coast Democrat to split the Democrat vote unless promised as ticket on a potentially winning slate. His chances of winning in 2020 are slim, but he can fuck it up unless the Dems promise him some quid pro quo.

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑
I belong to our local Democratic Party, am a donor and peripherally involved and aware of the national party. Hillary wants another go, but there's no chance. She will be blocked unless she has a secret, villainous plan. Beto is prancing, but I doubt he'd make it. Biden beats Trump and any other Democrat. The rational Republicans are mostly hoping that Trump steps down before 2020, and an untainted Republican steps up. Believe it or not, watch Kasich and Romney. My guess is that Biden will choose Kamala or Warren as VP and the party will coalesce around that far better than they did around Clinton.

Don't discount Inslee as a running partner for Biden. He probably has enough support as a youngish, rational, successful West Coast Democrat to split the Democrat vote unless promised as ticket on a potentially winning slate. His chances of winning in 2020 are slim, but he can fuck it up unless the Dems promise him some quid pro quo.

Inslee dreams. He's a nice guy, but no clout. I am pretty certain that dems want a female VP. He will set himself up for 2024 or '8. Biden is the safest choice right now.

Sunder wrote: ↑
I'll give him a coinflip on making it to 2020. He won't win if he does.

A lot of people are predicting he will step down in return for no charges against him or his spawn and the preservation of his financial empire. It sounds entirely plausible. The Trump fans will take this very poorly, and I wouldn't be surprised if there's violence.

Depending on the extent of his crimes, letting the guy walk could cause riots as well. And as we learned recently with Flynn, all a plea deal means is the prosecutor will ask the judge nicely to render a gentler verdict, but they don't have to if they think the guy's getting off too easy.

Sunder wrote: ↑
I'll give him a coinflip on making it to 2020. He won't win if he does.

A lot of people are predicting he will step down in return for no charges against him or his spawn and the preservation of his financial empire. It sounds entirely plausible. The Trump fans will take this very poorly, and I wouldn't be surprised if there's violence.

Depending on the extent of his crimes, letting the guy walk could cause riots as well. And as we learned recently with Flynn, all a plea deal means is the prosecutor will ask the judge nicely to render a gentler verdict, but they don't have to if they think the guy's getting off too easy.

Yeah. It may get ugly any way it goes down. But I will bet Trump fans go the most batshit berserk.

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑
I belong to our local Democratic Party, am a donor and peripherally involved and aware of the national party. Hillary wants another go, but there's no chance. She will be blocked unless she has a secret, villainous plan. Beto is prancing, but I doubt he'd make it. Biden beats Trump and any other Democrat. The rational Republicans are mostly hoping that Trump steps down before 2020, and an untainted Republican steps up. Believe it or not, watch Kasich and Romney. My guess is that Biden will choose Kamala or Warren as VP and the party will coalesce around that far better than they did around Clinton.

Man, you are down the RL rabbit hole. Ie beyond the YT point and stare. :lol:

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑
I belong to our local Democratic Party, am a donor and peripherally involved and aware of the national party. Hillary wants another go, but there's no chance. She will be blocked unless she has a secret, villainous plan. Beto is prancing, but I doubt he'd make it. Biden beats Trump and any other Democrat. The rational Republicans are mostly hoping that Trump steps down before 2020, and an untainted Republican steps up. Believe it or not, watch Kasich and Romney. My guess is that Biden will choose Kamala or Warren as VP and the party will coalesce around that far better than they did around Clinton.

Man, you are down the RL rabbit hole. Ie beyond the YT point and stare. :lol:

As far as me being down the rabbit hole, why don't you post some more videos of braid bimbos or a PJW tweet. Maybe try some of InfoWars brain supplements.

Also, try writing like a normal human. "Man, you are down the RL rabbit hole. Ie beyond the YT point and stare. :lol: " makes little to no sense. Your arrogance is so poorly founded that you don't seem to realize you're embarrassing yourself.

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑
I belong to our local Democratic Party, am a donor and peripherally involved and aware of the national party. Hillary wants another go, but there's no chance. She will be blocked unless she has a secret, villainous plan. Beto is prancing, but I doubt he'd make it. Biden beats Trump and any other Democrat. The rational Republicans are mostly hoping that Trump steps down before 2020, and an untainted Republican steps up. Believe it or not, watch Kasich and Romney. My guess is that Biden will choose Kamala or Warren as VP and the party will coalesce around that far better than they did around Clinton.

Man, you are down the RL rabbit hole. Ie beyond the YT point and stare. :lol:

As far as me being down the rabbit hole, why don't you post some more videos of braid bimbos or a PJW tweet. Maybe try some of InfoWars brain supplements.

Also, try writing like a normal human. "Man, you are down the RL rabbit hole. Ie beyond the YT point and stare. :lol: " makes little to no sense. Your arrogance is so poorly founded that you don't seem to realize you're embarrassing yourself.

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑
I belong to our local Democratic Party, am a donor and peripherally involved and aware of the national party. Hillary wants another go, but there's no chance. She will be blocked unless she has a secret, villainous plan. Beto is prancing, but I doubt he'd make it. Biden beats Trump and any other Democrat. The rational Republicans are mostly hoping that Trump steps down before 2020, and an untainted Republican steps up. Believe it or not, watch Kasich and Romney. My guess is that Biden will choose Kamala or Warren as VP and the party will coalesce around that far better than they did around Clinton.

Man, you are down the RL rabbit hole. Ie beyond the YT point and stare. :lol:

As far as me being down the rabbit hole, why don't you post some more videos of braid bimbos or a PJW tweet. Maybe try some of InfoWars brain supplements.

Also, try writing like a normal human. "Man, you are down the RL rabbit hole. Ie beyond the YT point and stare. :lol: " makes little to no sense. Your arrogance is so poorly founded that you don't seem to realize you're embarrassing yourself.

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑
I belong to our local Democratic Party, am a donor and peripherally involved and aware of the national party. Hillary wants another go, but there's no chance. She will be blocked unless she has a secret, villainous plan. Beto is prancing, but I doubt he'd make it. Biden beats Trump and any other Democrat. The rational Republicans are mostly hoping that Trump steps down before 2020, and an untainted Republican steps up. Believe it or not, watch Kasich and Romney. My guess is that Biden will choose Kamala or Warren as VP and the party will coalesce around that far better than they did around Clinton.

Man, you are down the RL rabbit hole. Ie beyond the YT point and stare. :lol:

If "RL" means regressive left, then your comment increases my suspicion that you don't really follow US politics or political parties that closely. It's been a complaint for a lot of people on the left that the Democrats are too "Neoliberal". By this people mean that they are somewhat liberal on social issues (e.g. yes to abortion but no to slavery reparations, and until about 2010 gay marriage was too far left for most of them) but not very far to the left on economic issues. In either case, they aren't doing a lot of pandering to the fringes. Part of Bernie Sanders' appeal was that he broke with the center left economic consensus and ran as a Social Democrat. Bernie didn't pick up a lot of identity politics baggage, though, he just ran on higher taxes and more extensive social welfare programs.

This is an asymmetry in American politics as the Republican party has been humping every extremist right wing political strain since Nixon discovered you could get elected by pandering to disaffected segregationists and fundamentalist christians. So yes, the Republican party is the party of Steve Bannon and David Duke, but no the Democratic party isn't bringing Melissa Click and Shaun King in to help with it's strategic vision. Its a little known fact that the Russian influence campaign in 2016 were actually heavily involved in trying to use #BLM type black identity groups to undermine Hillary Clinton (for more information check Sam Harris's most recent podcast, linked at the bottom). One lucky thing about the antifa types, is that most of them view the US government as the great satan, and think you need to build change from "outside the system" (i.e. through circle jerks, waving signs covered in nonsense, and magical thinking). Some of these people attract to the green party, which is a nuisance, but a lesser evil than having them coopt a major party the way their right wing counterparts have.

This is why the right wing is more dangerous than the left wing in the USA. The right wing undesirables have a direct line to Donald Trump, whereas the SJWs get symbolic gestures from the DNC at best.

Isn't Trump's approval pretty similar to a bunch of other Presidents, many of whom went on to have second terms? I guess he started lower, but is his approval that far off Obama, Clinton or Reagan at this point?

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑
I belong to our local Democratic Party, am a donor and peripherally involved and aware of the national party. Hillary wants another go, but there's no chance. She will be blocked unless she has a secret, villainous plan. Beto is prancing, but I doubt he'd make it. Biden beats Trump and any other Democrat. The rational Republicans are mostly hoping that Trump steps down before 2020, and an untainted Republican steps up. Believe it or not, watch Kasich and Romney. My guess is that Biden will choose Kamala or Warren as VP and the party will coalesce around that far better than they did around Clinton.

Man, you are down the RL rabbit hole. Ie beyond the YT point and stare. :lol:

As far as me being down the rabbit hole, why don't you post some more videos of braid bimbos or a PJW tweet. Maybe try some of InfoWars brain supplements.

Also, try writing like a normal human. "Man, you are down the RL rabbit hole. Ie beyond the YT point and stare. :lol: " makes little to no sense. Your arrogance is so poorly founded that you don't seem to realize you're embarrassing yourself.

"Creepy Uncle Joe" has a constant habit of getting in very close personal space with girls and women. It is uncomfortable and comical to watch in my opinion.

The difference between Trump saying "I grab them by the pussy and they let me" and Biden always leering in not so much the substance of their behavior... what is important is the audience. Republicans don't care so much that Trump is a player. They already know this and they hold their nose and vote for him anyway....but.... the left has no tolerance for creepy behavior these days. It is the left that caused Al Frankin to resign for no more that strong flirting and sexist jokes. "Creepy Uncle Joe's" behavior hurts him more because the left has less tolerance for this kind of behavior these days.

Also, the video above mostly shows Biden being drawn towards touching little girls. But, there are hundreds of similar instances where he gets right into the personal space of women. Often they are the wives of men he is meeting. I have known about this and I have called him "Creepy Uncle Joe" for years. I would not be surprised if women come out of the woodwork if he runs for president telling all kinds of stories about how creepy Biden is.

fafnir wrote: ↑
Isn't Trump's approval pretty similar to a bunch of other Presidents, many of whom went on to have second terms? I guess he started lower, but is his approval that far off Obama, Clinton or Reagan at this point?

No, not with consistently high disapproval ratings. Not to mention the fact that "Individual One" has two felony charges waiting for him. It will be especially hilarious if it is decided you can indict a sitting ptesident.

fafnir wrote: ↑
Isn't Trump's approval pretty similar to a bunch of other Presidents, many of whom went on to have second terms? I guess he started lower, but is his approval that far off Obama, Clinton or Reagan at this point?

His approval is close to that of previous presidents. He does have a higher disapproval rating because so few people are "neutral" in their opinion of him. It is fair to say he has a high disapproval rating but it is not very accurate to say he has a low approval rating.

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑
I belong to our local Democratic Party, am a donor and peripherally involved and aware of the national party. Hillary wants another go, but there's no chance. She will be blocked unless she has a secret, villainous plan. Beto is prancing, but I doubt he'd make it. Biden beats Trump and any other Democrat. The rational Republicans are mostly hoping that Trump steps down before 2020, and an untainted Republican steps up. Believe it or not, watch Kasich and Romney. My guess is that Biden will choose Kamala or Warren as VP and the party will coalesce around that far better than they did around Clinton.

Man, you are down the RL rabbit hole. Ie beyond the YT point and stare. :lol:

As far as me being down the rabbit hole, why don't you post some more videos of braid bimbos or a PJW tweet. Maybe try some of InfoWars brain supplements.

Also, try writing like a normal human. "Man, you are down the RL rabbit hole. Ie beyond the YT point and stare. :lol: " makes little to no sense. Your arrogance is so poorly founded that you don't seem to realize you're embarrassing yourself.

"Creepy Uncle Joe" has a constant habit of getting in very close personal space with girls and women. It is uncomfortable and comical to watch in my opinion.

The difference between Trump saying "I grab them by the pussy and they let me" and Biden always leering in not so much the substance of their behavior... what is important is the audience. Republicans don't care so much that Trump is a player. They already know this and they hold their nose and vote for him anyway....but.... the left has no tolerance for creepy behavior these days. It is the left that caused Al Frankin to resign for no more that strong flirting and sexist jokes. "Creepy Uncle Joe's" behavior hurts him more because the left has less tolerance for this kind of behavior these days.

Also, the video above mostly shows Biden being drawn towards touching little girls. But, there are hundreds of similar instances where he gets right into the personal space of women. Often they are the wives of men he is meeting. I have known about this and I have called him "Creepy Uncle Joe" for years. I would not be surprised if women come out of the woodwork if he runs for president telling all kinds of stories about how creepy Biden is.

Damn this is fun.

If you have enough footage taken of you, anybody can compile a reel that makes you look bad. The original "Creepy" videos started when he was considering a run in '16. I would be surprised if substantiated stuff came out after the falling crest wave of #MeToo. Democrats looked bad with the Kavanaugh nomination.

But you see the difference in between Democrats and Republicans. Things that would sink a Democrat (serial philandering, extramarital affairs, voyuerism) have no effect or possibly even a positive one for Trump. It's a conundrum.

fafnir wrote: ↑
Isn't Trump's approval pretty similar to a bunch of other Presidents, many of whom went on to have second terms? I guess he started lower, but is his approval that far off Obama, Clinton or Reagan at this point?

His approval is close to that of previous presidents. He does have a higher disapproval rating because so few people are "neutral" in their opinion of him. It is fair to say he has a high disapproval rating but it is not very accurate to say he has a low approval rating.

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑
If you have enough footage taken of you, anybody can compile a reel that makes you look bad. The original "Creepy" videos started when he was considering a run in '16. I would be surprised if substantiated stuff came out after the falling crest wave of #MeToo. Democrats looked bad with the Kavanaugh nomination.

But you see the difference in between Democrats and Republicans. Things that would sink a Democrat (serial philandering, extramarital affairs, voyuerism) have no effect or possibly even a positive one for Trump. It's a conundrum.

You have got to be kidding me. I have never touched a girl like this in my life (except my own child). I am smart enough to know that almost any young girl would be upset by an adult man behaving this way.

fafnir wrote: ↑
Isn't Trump's approval pretty similar to a bunch of other Presidents, many of whom went on to have second terms? I guess he started lower, but is his approval that far off Obama, Clinton or Reagan at this point?

His approval is close to that of previous presidents. He does have a higher disapproval rating because so few people are "neutral" in their opinion of him. It is fair to say he has a high disapproval rating but it is not very accurate to say he has a low approval rating.

He has a VERY strong approval rating among Republicans (around 85%) and a VERY strong disapproval rating among Democrats (roughly 80% ). Independents tend to disapprove more than approve of him, but not as strongly as Democrats (only around 40% approve him, 60% disapprove).

Christ guys.... I never said Trump isn't creepy. He is creepy as fuck and he is a total ass-hole.... my main point is that Creepy Uncle Joe's creepy behavior will hurt him more than Trump's creepy behavior. Biden could lose the nomination just based on his creepy behavior and Trump is immune. That is all I am saying.

John D wrote: ↑
Christ guys.... I never said Trump isn't creepy. He is creepy as fuck and he is a total ass-hole.... my main point is that Creepy Uncle Joe's creepy behavior will hurt him more than Trump's creepy behavior. Biden could lose the nomination just based on his creepy behavior and Trump is immune. That is all I am saying.

I don't disagree. Plus he is too fucking old. I hope that the dems can round up someone that isn't a fossil or a total fuckup. For the benefit of everyone.

John D wrote: ↑
Christ guys.... I never said Trump isn't creepy. He is creepy as fuck and he is a total ass-hole.... my main point is that Creepy Uncle Joe's creepy behavior will hurt him more than Trump's creepy behavior. Biden could lose the nomination just based on his creepy behavior and Trump is immune. That is all I am saying.

I don't disagree. Plus he is too fucking old. I hope that the dems can round up someone that isn't a fossil or a total fuckup. For the benefit of everyone.

Biden polled highest. That is the reality. The Republicans have a real chance if Trump is out in 2020. Dems have a sparse player roster, there's no denying that.

Or, to be specific, current polling among all voters indicated that Biden would beat Trump, Bernie (gods help us) would tie, and Warren and Beto would lose. This, to be fair, is before the big Mueller reveal. So odds of after that.

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑
I belong to our local Democratic Party, am a donor and peripherally involved and aware of the national party. Hillary wants another go, but there's no chance. She will be blocked unless she has a secret, villainous plan. Beto is prancing, but I doubt he'd make it. Biden beats Trump and any other Democrat. The rational Republicans are mostly hoping that Trump steps down before 2020, and an untainted Republican steps up. Believe it or not, watch Kasich and Romney. My guess is that Biden will choose Kamala or Warren as VP and the party will coalesce around that far better than they did around Clinton.

Man, you are down the RL rabbit hole. Ie beyond the YT point and stare. :lol:

As far as me being down the rabbit hole, why don't you post some more videos of braid bimbos or a PJW tweet. Maybe try some of InfoWars brain supplements.

Also, try writing like a normal human. "Man, you are down the RL rabbit hole. Ie beyond the YT point and stare. :lol: " makes little to no sense. Your arrogance is so poorly founded that you don't seem to realize you're embarrassing yourself.

"Creepy Uncle Joe" has a constant habit of getting in very close personal space with girls and women. It is uncomfortable and comical to watch in my opinion.

The difference between Trump saying "I grab them by the pussy and they let me" and Biden always leering in not so much the substance of their behavior... what is important is the audience. Republicans don't care so much that Trump is a player. They already know this and they hold their nose and vote for him anyway....but.... the left has no tolerance for creepy behavior these days. It is the left that caused Al Frankin to resign for no more that strong flirting and sexist jokes. "Creepy Uncle Joe's" behavior hurts him more because the left has less tolerance for this kind of behavior these days.

Also, the video above mostly shows Biden being drawn towards touching little girls. But, there are hundreds of similar instances where he gets right into the personal space of women. Often they are the wives of men he is meeting. I have known about this and I have called him "Creepy Uncle Joe" for years. I would not be surprised if women come out of the woodwork if he runs for president telling all kinds of stories about how creepy Biden is.

Damn this is fun.

If you have enough footage taken of you, anybody can compile a reel that makes you look bad. The original "Creepy" videos started when he was considering a run in '16. I would be surprised if substantiated stuff came out after the falling crest wave of #MeToo. Democrats looked bad with the Kavanaugh nomination.

But you see the difference in between Democrats and Republicans. Things that would sink a Democrat (serial philandering, extramarital affairs, voyuerism) have no effect or possibly even a positive one for Trump. It's a conundrum.

A Joe Biden 2020 Campaign Would Be the Most Divisive Thing for the Democratic Field. The vice president's track record in Congress puts him on the wrong side of every issue that currently energizes his political party.

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑
I belong to our local Democratic Party, am a donor and peripherally involved and aware of the national party. Hillary wants another go, but there's no chance. She will be blocked unless she has a secret, villainous plan. Beto is prancing, but I doubt he'd make it. Biden beats Trump and any other Democrat. The rational Republicans are mostly hoping that Trump steps down before 2020, and an untainted Republican steps up. Believe it or not, watch Kasich and Romney. My guess is that Biden will choose Kamala or Warren as VP and the party will coalesce around that far better than they did around Clinton.

Man, you are down the RL rabbit hole. Ie beyond the YT point and stare. :lol:

As far as me being down the rabbit hole, why don't you post some more videos of braid bimbos or a PJW tweet. Maybe try some of InfoWars brain supplements.

Also, try writing like a normal human. "Man, you are down the RL rabbit hole. Ie beyond the YT point and stare. :lol: " makes little to no sense. Your arrogance is so poorly founded that you don't seem to realize you're embarrassing yourself.

"Creepy Uncle Joe" has a constant habit of getting in very close personal space with girls and women. It is uncomfortable and comical to watch in my opinion.

The difference between Trump saying "I grab them by the pussy and they let me" and Biden always leering in not so much the substance of their behavior... what is important is the audience. Republicans don't care so much that Trump is a player. They already know this and they hold their nose and vote for him anyway....but.... the left has no tolerance for creepy behavior these days. It is the left that caused Al Frankin to resign for no more that strong flirting and sexist jokes. "Creepy Uncle Joe's" behavior hurts him more because the left has less tolerance for this kind of behavior these days.

Also, the video above mostly shows Biden being drawn towards touching little girls. But, there are hundreds of similar instances where he gets right into the personal space of women. Often they are the wives of men he is meeting. I have known about this and I have called him "Creepy Uncle Joe" for years. I would not be surprised if women come out of the woodwork if he runs for president telling all kinds of stories about how creepy Biden is.

Damn this is fun.

If you have enough footage taken of you, anybody can compile a reel that makes you look bad. The original "Creepy" videos started when he was considering a run in '16. I would be surprised if substantiated stuff came out after the falling crest wave of #MeToo. Democrats looked bad with the Kavanaugh nomination.

But you see the difference in between Democrats and Republicans. Things that would sink a Democrat (serial philandering, extramarital affairs, voyuerism) have no effect or possibly even a positive one for Trump. It's a conundrum.

It’s a left wing purity spiral.

Is it? Or is it a lack of morality spiral on the Republican side? The ends regardless of the means has never worked well, historically speaking.

The dude is 76. “Four more years” would be a desperate plea for life.
He first ran for President a year before AOC was born ...
Old, white and past his use by.

And yet ....

The dude did compliment Obama for scrubbing up clean and presentable for a black man. Very old school KKK. Further, the Economist described him as possessing an “unconventional sense of private space”. An elderly mother of a colleague complained to said son that “the only other man to have touched her like that was his father”. :lol:

So. Let’s assume every virtue signalling demo-prog turns out in November ‘20 to get their “I slayed the dragon” badge. This picks up the slacktivists who didn’t vote Hillary (out of Bernie sads) but expected their sisters to do the deed for them.

And Biden’s, well lets say ‘unorthodox’ characteristics may well appeal to a subset of deplorables.

Further he doesn’t start a turf war between the left and very left ideologues because he’s clearly yesterday’s hero there to break through Drumph. Opportunities abound.

No. Biden would be a classic “means to an end” unprincipled choice of convenience.

Restoring norms is hardly a "means to an end," Brive. You of all people should appreciate that. Trump is corrupt beyond all reason. Longtime conservatives are voting Democrat. My extended family, almost all of them 1%s are going Democrat. Trump isn't a sledgehammer against the status quo, he's just a leech. A vicious, slimy bloodsucker. One unusually adept at getting people to unabashedly bare their breasts for him to feed. That's all. He has empowered your direst enemies beyond all reason. People that would never have supported open borders recoil in horror at Trump's family seperation policy. But that's why you never let the devil in your kitchen, as our country folk say.

John D wrote: ↑
Christ guys.... I never said Trump isn't creepy. He is creepy as fuck and he is a total ass-hole.... my main point is that Creepy Uncle Joe's creepy behavior will hurt him more than Trump's creepy behavior. Biden could lose the nomination just based on his creepy behavior and Trump is immune. That is all I am saying.

I don't disagree. Plus he is too fucking old. I hope that the dems can round up someone that isn't a fossil or a total fuckup. For the benefit of everyone.

I think it will be Kamala Harris. She's the darling of the donors, hits all the right identity buttons, and can be milquetoast enough to appeal to both the progressive and the centrist wing of theDemd. I wouldn't be satisfied with her, but at least she's not Kirsten Gillibrand.

My favorite Democratic pick, if I was an American citizen, would be Bernie Sanders, but he's old as fuck and the donors/Clintonites hate his guts. Alternatively Elizabeth Warren or (very unlikely) Tulsi Gabbard. But realistically they don't stand much of a chance, not even Warren, against Harris. The Clintonite base and the donors don't like them a bit, and the woke smears will make them vulnerable, while Harris has more oppression points than all of them combined.

Biden would be a compromise choice to "heal the country", but if he clashes against Harris he's going to be hammered doen as an "old white male". The only way I can see him winning is if Harris decides that she's going to piggyback on him and wait four more years. Or agree to be Biden's vice president and be just a heartbeat away from the White House.

John D wrote: ↑
Christ guys.... I never said Trump isn't creepy. He is creepy as fuck and he is a total ass-hole.... my main point is that Creepy Uncle Joe's creepy behavior will hurt him more than Trump's creepy behavior. Biden could lose the nomination just based on his creepy behavior and Trump is immune. That is all I am saying.

I don't disagree. Plus he is too fucking old. I hope that the dems can round up someone that isn't a fossil or a total fuckup. For the benefit of everyone.

I think it will be Kamala Harris. She's the darling of the donors, hits all the right identity buttons, and can be milquetoast enough to appeal to both the progressive and the centrist wing of theDemd. I wouldn't be satisfied with her, but at least she's not Kirsten Gillibrand.

My favorite Democratic pick, if I was an American citizen, would be Bernie Sanders, but he's old as fuck and the donors/Clintonites hate his guts. Alternatively Elizabeth Warren or (very unlikely) Tulsi Gabbard. But realistically they don't stand much of a chance, not even Warren, against Harris. The Clintonite base and the donors don't like them a bit, and the woke smears will make them vulnerable, while Harris has more oppression points than all of them combined.

Biden would be a compromise choice to "heal the country", but if he clashes against Harris he's going to be hammered doen as an "old white male". The only way I can see him winning is if Harris decides that she's going to piggyback on him and wait four more years. Or agree to be Biden's vice president and be just a heartbeat away from the White House.

It is still pretty early. I suspect we will see some new faces. Maybe some Democrat governors. No one knew Jimmy Carter or Bill Clinton two years before the election. The current roster of "known" Dems on the National stage is really weak.

John D wrote: ↑
Christ guys.... I never said Trump isn't creepy. He is creepy as fuck and he is a total ass-hole.... my main point is that Creepy Uncle Joe's creepy behavior will hurt him more than Trump's creepy behavior. Biden could lose the nomination just based on his creepy behavior and Trump is immune. That is all I am saying.

I don't disagree. Plus he is too fucking old. I hope that the dems can round up someone that isn't a fossil or a total fuckup. For the benefit of everyone.

I think it will be Kamala Harris. She's the darling of the donors, hits all the right identity buttons, and can be milquetoast enough to appeal to both the progressive and the centrist wing of theDemd. I wouldn't be satisfied with her, but at least she's not Kirsten Gillibrand.

That amuses me, because it's pretty much exactly how I feel about Kamala Harris.

Kirbmarc wrote: ↑My favorite Democratic pick, if I was an American citizen, would be Bernie Sanders, but he's old as fuck and the donors/Clintonites hate his guts. Alternatively Elizabeth Warren or (very unlikely) Tulsi Gabbard. But realistically they don't stand much of a chance, not even Warren, against Harris. The Clintonite base and the donors don't like them a bit, and the woke smears will make them vulnerable, while Harris has more oppression points than all of them combined.

Biden would be a compromise choice to "heal the country", but if he clashes against Harris he's going to be hammered doen as an "old white male". The only way I can see him winning is if Harris decides that she's going to piggyback on him and wait four more years. Or agree to be Biden's vice president and be just a heartbeat away from the White House.

I think Biden is the boring and old-as-fuck choice.

It seems like the conventional wisdom is that he's the favorite, but I remember his last primary - 10 years ago. He pitched himself as the candidate with the best experience, and wound up dropping out of the race with a grand total of 0 (zero) delegates. Hillary also ran as the resume candidate, and smoked him. His resume angle was the reason Obama gave him the VP slot, since a major criticism of Obama was that he was too new and inexperienced to be a good choice for the presidency. Having been VP may be Biden's best asset, but I'm not convinced it changes his basic argument, and thus his marketability to the Democratic primary electorate.

I think the Democratic primaries will go to someone who hasn't run before, and someone who isn't a complete insider. I'm not sure people are enjoying the ramifications of Trump being a total n00b as much as many of them expected too, but it's been suggested that this was one of his more powerful selling points. Experience might be worth a little more than it was last time around, but I'm not sure the General Electorate is going to want a candidate who was elected to the US Senate for the first time in 1972.

Personally, I think Warren would be a good choice, but I don't know that she is politically mainstream enough. Harris is probably the one who would put money on if I were a betting man.

Personally, I think Warren would be a good choice, but I don't know that she is politically mainstream enough. Harris is probably the one who would put money on if I were a betting man.

If her recent appearances are any indication, I would think Warren would be a disaster. She comes as weak with a whiny tone and unable to dismiss the attacks on her and either go on the offensive or take over the topic with what she would look to accomplish. She needs to stay away from explaining that it is OK or you should vote for her because she is a woman or she is going to just repeat Clinton's worst mistakes.
I haven't seen a lot of Harris, she seems to present herself well but so far hasn't come up against the repub attack machine yet as far as I know.
Maybe someone will come out of nowhere like Obama did?

John D wrote: ↑
Christ guys.... I never said Trump isn't creepy. He is creepy as fuck and he is a total ass-hole.... my main point is that Creepy Uncle Joe's creepy behavior will hurt him more than Trump's creepy behavior. Biden could lose the nomination just based on his creepy behavior and Trump is immune. That is all I am saying.

I don't disagree. Plus he is too fucking old. I hope that the dems can round up someone that isn't a fossil or a total fuckup. For the benefit of everyone.

I think it will be Kamala Harris. She's the darling of the donors, hits all the right identity buttons, and can be milquetoast enough to appeal to both the progressive and the centrist wing of theDemd. I wouldn't be satisfied with her, but at least she's not Kirsten Gillibrand.

That amuses me, because it's pretty much exactly how I feel about Kamala Harris.

Kirbmarc wrote: ↑My favorite Democratic pick, if I was an American citizen, would be Bernie Sanders, but he's old as fuck and the donors/Clintonites hate his guts. Alternatively Elizabeth Warren or (very unlikely) Tulsi Gabbard. But realistically they don't stand much of a chance, not even Warren, against Harris. The Clintonite base and the donors don't like them a bit, and the woke smears will make them vulnerable, while Harris has more oppression points than all of them combined.

Biden would be a compromise choice to "heal the country", but if he clashes against Harris he's going to be hammered doen as an "old white male". The only way I can see him winning is if Harris decides that she's going to piggyback on him and wait four more years. Or agree to be Biden's vice president and be just a heartbeat away from the White House.

I think Biden is the boring and old-as-fuck choice.

It seems like the conventional wisdom is that he's the favorite, but I remember his last primary - 10 years ago. He pitched himself as the candidate with the best experience, and wound up dropping out of the race with a grand total of 0 (zero) delegates. Hillary also ran as the resume candidate, and smoked him. His resume angle was the reason Obama gave him the VP slot, since a major criticism of Obama was that he was too new and inexperienced to be a good choice for the presidency. Having been VP may be Biden's best asset, but I'm not convinced it changes his basic argument, and thus his marketability to the Democratic primary electorate.

I think the Democratic primaries will go to someone who hasn't run before, and someone who isn't a complete insider. I'm not sure people are enjoying the ramifications of Trump being a total n00b as much as many of them expected too, but it's been suggested that this was one of his more powerful selling points. Experience might be worth a little more than it was last time around, but I'm not sure the General Electorate is going to want a candidate who was elected to the US Senate for the first time in 1972.

Personally, I think Warren would be a good choice, but I don't know that she is politically mainstream enough. Harris is probably the one who would put money on if I were a betting man.

I told you, Inslee - I called it back in 2010 that he would be at least a very strong candidate for the Dem nomination for 2020, and would have a better than even chance to be the Dem candidate in 2024.

John D wrote: ↑
Christ guys.... I never said Trump isn't creepy. He is creepy as fuck and he is a total ass-hole.... my main point is that Creepy Uncle Joe's creepy behavior will hurt him more than Trump's creepy behavior. Biden could lose the nomination just based on his creepy behavior and Trump is immune. That is all I am saying.

I don't disagree. Plus he is too fucking old. I hope that the dems can round up someone that isn't a fossil or a total fuckup. For the benefit of everyone.

I think it will be Kamala Harris. She's the darling of the donors, hits all the right identity buttons, and can be milquetoast enough to appeal to both the progressive and the centrist wing of theDemd. I wouldn't be satisfied with her, but at least she's not Kirsten Gillibrand.

That amuses me, because it's pretty much exactly how I feel about Kamala Harris.

Kirbmarc wrote: ↑My favorite Democratic pick, if I was an American citizen, would be Bernie Sanders, but he's old as fuck and the donors/Clintonites hate his guts. Alternatively Elizabeth Warren or (very unlikely) Tulsi Gabbard. But realistically they don't stand much of a chance, not even Warren, against Harris. The Clintonite base and the donors don't like them a bit, and the woke smears will make them vulnerable, while Harris has more oppression points than all of them combined.

Biden would be a compromise choice to "heal the country", but if he clashes against Harris he's going to be hammered doen as an "old white male". The only way I can see him winning is if Harris decides that she's going to piggyback on him and wait four more years. Or agree to be Biden's vice president and be just a heartbeat away from the White House.

I think Biden is the boring and old-as-fuck choice.

It seems like the conventional wisdom is that he's the favorite, but I remember his last primary - 10 years ago. He pitched himself as the candidate with the best experience, and wound up dropping out of the race with a grand total of 0 (zero) delegates. Hillary also ran as the resume candidate, and smoked him. His resume angle was the reason Obama gave him the VP slot, since a major criticism of Obama was that he was too new and inexperienced to be a good choice for the presidency. Having been VP may be Biden's best asset, but I'm not convinced it changes his basic argument, and thus his marketability to the Democratic primary electorate.

I think the Democratic primaries will go to someone who hasn't run before, and someone who isn't a complete insider. I'm not sure people are enjoying the ramifications of Trump being a total n00b as much as many of them expected too, but it's been suggested that this was one of his more powerful selling points. Experience might be worth a little more than it was last time around, but I'm not sure the General Electorate is going to want a candidate who was elected to the US Senate for the first time in 1972.

Personally, I think Warren would be a good choice, but I don't know that she is politically mainstream enough. Harris is probably the one who would put money on if I were a betting man.

I told you, Inslee - I called it back in 2010 that he would be at least a very strong candidate for the Dem nomination for 2020, and would have a better than even chance to be the Dem candidate in 2024.

TBH I don't really know enough about Inslee to have an opinion on him. Having been a governor is a definite advantage for a presidential candidate though, so there is that.